Question 1: (12 points)

There is mounting scientific evidence regarding the influence of human activities on the planet's changing climate. Using material drawn from articles and CSR frameworks, discuss whether is it socially responsible for large corporations to not engage in sustainability efforts beyond that which is required by law?

Question 2: (15 points)

Canadian and US corporations routinely engage in business with partners from developing countries where the workplace standards vary significantly from those in North America. In recent years, Apple has been criticized for its supply chain partners' workplace conditions and worker treatment. Additionally, many global brands including Loblaw's Joe Fresh, H & M, and Benetton partnered with garment manufacturers at Rana Plaza, the facility that collapsed and killed 1, 138 employees and injured over 2, 500. Recently, researchers have alleged that the supply chains of numerous automobile companies including GM, VW, and Tesla, may include forced labour. In a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of the Rana Plaza victims against Loblaws, lawyers argued that, "Western corporations which seek to benefit from the low cost of labour in [various] countries . . . must be held accountable when the workers that produce their products are exposed to unnecessary risks and are injured or die as a result of unsafe working conditions."

Drawing upon Zwolinski's, and Arnold & Bowie's perspectives as well as other course material, discuss whether Canadian corporations that outsource their work have some responsibility for their business partners' workplace conditions and worker treatment. If yes, in your discussion, identify specific responsibilities and indicate why they are important.

Question 3: (12 points)

1. Identify and describe two specific business practices commonly used during the 2008-2010 financial crisis. Using course content, discuss whether each of these practices was acceptable or not.

OR

1. Moriarty writes that the average CEO earn $8 million or 301 times that of the average employee and presents three views of determining executive compensation.

Summarize each perspective and discuss which you agree with and why.

Case for Question 4: (27 points)

Virgin, one of the most well-known global brands, was co-founded by Sir Richard Branson and Nik Powel in 1970. Spread over multiple industries including communications, travel, and healthcare, over four hundred companies have emerged under its banner over time. Given its spread, Virgin focuses on delivering a positive "customer experience" instead of any single product or service. Some characterize the brand as being "created for the people. It's not afraid to think outside of the box, try new things, and adapt."

This "out of the box thinking" also applies to Virgin's marketing campaigns. Its Global Brand Director, Claire Hilton, notes that the company's ads "have long occupied an iconic space of their own." Virgin's 'Christmas-hanukwanzakah' campaign poked fun at religion. As a part of its 'Nothing to Hide' campaign, Sir Richard Branson stood in New York's Times Square in a nude suit. Virgin Mobile's 'Strip2Clothe' advertising campaign, designed in partnership with the National Network for Youth (NN4Y), a lobbying group that supports homeless youth, elicited some controversy.

On July 7, Virgin Mobile introduced the campaign with the slogan "You take of yours, we'll donate ours." The company's website said that there are millions of homeless teenagers in the United States and, "someone out there needs clothes more than you." Virgin Mobile invited teenagers to upload videos of themselves disrobing to music. For every uploaded striptease video, the company would donate a new piece of clothing. For every five times the video was viewed, an additional piece of clothing would be donated. Virgin Mobile said that it would screen all the videos. The strippers had to be eighteen or older, and there was to be no full nudity. By July 12, there were twenty videos on the site that had generated 51,291 pieces of donated clothing.

The campaign sparked immediate criticism. A representative of the Catholic Charities of St. Paul and Minneapolis said the campaign was "distasteful and inappropriate and exploitive." Parents and grandparents were concerned that their under 18-year-old children or grandchildren would strip, upload the video, and not reveal their real ages. On July 15, NN4Y said that it would not partner with Virgin Mobile. Some of the 150 charities associated with NN4Y said that the campaign was inappropriate given that many of the homeless teenagers were sexually exploited. Others said that the campaign was in poor taste and targeted youth. Still others said that the homeless needed shelter and safety rather than clothes.

But there were some supporters. Rick Koca, the founder of Stand Up for Kids in San Diego, said that the campaign was not hurting anyone and that it was raising public awareness. In the week ending July 19, the controversy and the campaign had resulted in a further 15,000 clothing donations.

Question 4:

Use two ethical theories and your knowledge of ethical marketing to assess whether this campaign was ethically acceptable. (27 points)